2018 was a busy and, in many ways, head spinning year on the redistricting front - with action in both state and federal court and at the ballot box. A look back. #fairmaps 1/

Things kicked off on January 5, when the special master in the racial gerrymandering challenge to North Carolina's legislative maps issued his recommendations on how the maps should be redrawn. brennancenter.org/sites/default/…#fairmaps 2/

Then, on Jan 9, while the court in the NC racial gerrymandering case was weighing recommendations for fixes to the legislative maps, a different federal court issued a ruling striking down NC's congressional map as a partisan gerrymander. brennancenter.org/sites/default/…#fairmaps 3/

Meanwhile, a pair of partisan gerrymandering challenges to Pennsylvania's congressional map - one brought in state court and one in federal court - were also pending. #fairmaps 4/

On Jan 10, the court in the federal case rejected the challenge, which had been based on the federal constitution's Elections Clause. ithttps://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/images/Agre_v_Wolf_Judgment_1.10.18.pdf #fairmaps 5/

But two weeks later, on Jan 22, the PA Supreme Court struck down the congressional map for violating the state constitution & ordered that it be redrawn. This would set off a truly bizarre set of maneuvers to try to stave off a new map. brennancenter.org/sites/default/…#fairmaps 6/

Those efforts would involve arguing that the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court somehow violated the federal constitution on the theory that only state legislatures could draw congressional maps. #fairmaps 7/

The claim was so frivolous that Justice Alito didn't bother referring it to the whole court but simply denied it on his own. #fairmaps 8/

But wait! Pennsylvania Republicans weren't done. They filed another stay request at the Supreme Court to try to block the redrawing of the map - and then when that didn't work, appealed the new map. In both instances, making essentially the same argument. #fairmaps 9/

But, as the late-night commercials say, wait, there's more! In addition to trying to get the US Supreme Court to block redrawing of the map, PA Republicans also threatened to impeach the state supreme court justices who struck down the map. brennancenter.org/analysis/legis…#fairmaps 10/

Fortunately, those efforts didn't get anywhere - at least not yet. #fairmaps 11/

Which NC Republicans not surprising appealed to the Supreme Court. #fairmaps 13/

At the same time, they sought and obtained a stay putting on redrawing of the NC congressional map on hold. #fairmaps 14/

This would set up an interesting midterm contrast between PA and NC - two of the most extremely gerrymandered states, one which would have a new map and one which would continue to use its gerrymandered map. #fairmaps 15/

In the mean time, 2018 also was - or so we thought - the year of partisan gerrymandering at SCOTUS, where with cases out of WI and MD, the Supreme Court would finally have a chance to say when maps go too far. Ah, hindsight. #fairmaps 16/

But then . . . Justice Kennedy, whom many had looked to as the savior on partisan gerrymandering (perhaps too much so), retired. #fairmaps 18/

However, if there was any concern that lower courts would be skittish about taking on the subject, that hasn't proven to be the case (though that's perhaps made easier by the egregiousness of the cases before them). #fairmaps 19/

In late August, the three-judge panel in the NC partisan gerrymandering case again struck down the state's congressional map, setting the stage for return of the NC case to SCOTUS in spring 2019. brennancenter.org/sites/default/…#fairmaps 20/

Then in November, the panel in the Maryland partisan gerrymandering case struck down the Democratic gerrymander of MD's congressional map - and thanks to an agreement for expedited briefing, that case also looks set for SCOTUS in the spring. brennancenter.org/sites/default/…#fairmaps 21/

But the redistricting action this year hasn't just been in partisan gerrymandering. The summer also brought three *new* cases seeking creation of additional majority-minority congressional districts in AL, LA, and MS. #fairmaps 22/

This summer also brought an end - with one narrow exception - to the long-running fights over Texas' congressional and state house maps, which a SCOTUS decision that overturned findings of intentional discrimination. brennancenter.org/sites/default/…#fairmaps 24/

One state house district in Fort Worth will need to be tweaked to undo racial gerrymandering, but the bigger changes that plaintiffs were hoping for in the maps were rejected - though efforts to bail Texas back into preclearance coverage are proceeding. #fairmaps 25/

Meanwhile, in Virginia, fights over the state's house of delegates with a federal court ruling in June that 11 districts needed to be redrawn to undo racial gerrymandering. brennancenter.org/sites/default/…#fairmaps 26/

As the year ends, though, Virginia Republicans are asking the Supreme Court to put the process of adopting a new map on hold, pending an appeal of the case the high court will hear in the spring. brennancenter.org/sites/default/…#fairmaps 28/

And let's not leave out Georgia, where a series of challenges to both legislative and congressional maps are pending. #fairmaps 29/

(If all this sounds like a lot of redistricting litigation to still be going on in the eighth year of the decade - only a couple of years before the next redistricting cycle - you're right. Welcome to American exceptionalism, example 876760) #fairmaps 32/

But if 2018 was a year of a lot of redistricting action in the courts, it also was the year of a lot of redistricting *reform* at the ballot box, with voters in five states approving measures to make the process work better in 2021. brennancenter.org/blog/everybody…#fairmaps 36/

And that I suspect is a harbinger of the future. Redistricting has tended to occur in the dark. It may still yet in many places - but more than ever people of all political stripes get it, understand the need for fixes, understand the need to participate. #fairmaps 37/

The 2021 map cycle will bring its own set of challenges (every cycle is different), but it also will bring - I suspect - a far more engaged and empowered citizenry than ever before. #fairmaps 38/

A few more thoughts on the North Carolina partisan gerrymandering cases - or more specifically the facts. #fairmaps#ncpol 2/

Although some are skeptical about what the Supreme Court will do in the partisan gerrymandering cases it took today (and not without justification, especially given Justice Kennedy’s retirement), it’s important to remember how unusual the facts of NC are. #fairmaps#ncpol 3/

A bunch of handwringing debate about Beto O'Rourke's performance in the smaller Texas counties - where his 26.6% of the vote underperformed Bill White's 32.4% but bettered Wendy Davis' all-time D low of 22.6%. #txlege 1/

And there is no question that doing better in rural Texas would have helped O'Rourke close the gap with Ted Cruz. But it's important to remember that the smaller counties only contribute around 21% of the vote, so the impact of "underperformance" can be exaggerated. #txlege 2/

Even if O'Rourke had won the same percentage of the vote in the smaller counties as Bill White, he still would have come up short (a lot closer to be sure but still short). #txlege 3/

Related threads

At the risk of being attacked from all sides, a few short words on Brexit and the Labour Party. One thing I can see is that, in general, *both* sides of the argument have their hearts in the right place. Both want something positive in left wing terms. 1/

The Labour people advocating remain, don’t do so to protect their privilege, they don’t do so from ivory towers and to try to stop a genuine left wing government. Very much the opposite. They do so because they think Brexit makes a left wing government’s life much harder. 2/

For most, it’s a genuine concern that Brexit will harm exactly the people and institutions that Labour should protect. It will harm the NHS, cripple social care, raise food prices (which hit the poor the hardest) and so forth. It will make it much harder to reverse austerity 3/

“CrossfireHurricane began with SIGINT supplied by NSA & allied intelligence services. This happened BEFORE any drunken boasting was tipped off to FBI. Some of this intelligence included suspicious money movements into US political campaigns...”

...not only keep in touch with family, but to run criminal enterprises from behind bars. Prisoners use them to buy and sell drugs, intimidate & threaten witnesses and victims of their crimes, and order hits on rivals & prison officials. Don't buy into that "fallen angel" B.S.!

Food must meet nutritional guidelines set by the federal & state gov't. If the inmates or anyone else feels this is not the case, they or an interested party can file suit to correct the problem or complain to both state and federal officials. ...

2/ The United States Supreme Court has said that if a person's actions violate a federal law and a state law, double jeopardy does not mean they can't be brought to trial in both state and federal court because the two jurisdictions are independent.

.@EPAScottPruitt spent over $105,000 on first-class flights in 2017, in addition to the $58,000 Pruitt rang up on charter flights and a military jet to carry him from an event with Trump in Cincinnati to catch a connecting flight to Europe out of NYpoliti.co/2DJ0WR5

(THREAD) Erik Prince—Trump advisor; ex-head of a murderous mercenary army; would-be head of Trump's private spy agency; would-be head of a privatized U.S. army—is a dangerous liar. He just testified under oath. This is a live reading of the transcript. Hope you'll read and share.

1/ Not only did Prince appear without counsel—though he could be charged with a crime for any lie he told—he told the House Intel Committee he had no plans to *hire* an attorney. In the situation he's in—and given who he is—that statement is actually chilling. I'll tell you why.

2/ It suggests he may expect a pardon for any misconduct; or is so confident the GOP won't make him answer any questions he doesn't want to that he sees no risk of self-incrimination; or that he's that confident in his skills as a liar; or thinks his misdeeds can't be uncovered.